bi amp imrpoving?

Are you referring to passive or active biamping? With active systems(which I've been implemented, at home, since 1980), your amps are only required to process the bandwidth assigned them. This, for instance, relieves the mid/high freq amp of the burden of reproducing bass, cleaning up it's signal and increasing dynamics. You can also use tubes on top, where they best perform their magic, and SS on the bottom, for the best slam, speed and definition. Passive biamping provides less in the way of benefits, but is much less costly, and easier for most to implement correctly(given identical amps with which to work). Articles on both methods: (http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm)(http://www.padrick.net/LiveSound/Biwiring/Biwiring.htm)

Active biamping is simple with as little a Dahlquist DQLP-1(still used by Marchisotto, to biamp the Alón Exotica Grand Reference system). I used (and modded in a number of ways) one over the course of almost 25 years, with a variety of systems, and excellent results. I might still have it, were it not for the present acoustic nightmare of a listening room a divorce stuck me with. A TacT RCS 2.2 has rectified the situation quite nicely though. There's an LP-1 for sale on AudiogoN now: (http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?misceqal&1283407862&/Dahlquist-DQ-LP1-electronic-cr)

Keep in mind that it is not REALLY necessary to bypass, or delete, the existing crossovers in your speaker system, to experience most of the benefits of active biamping. Those are primarily gained though the elimination of highs and lows being fed to the amps that don't need to reproduce them, via the low/high pass filter of the active crossover. That's providing that your speakers are equipped with a network that can be split by removable jumpers. Happy listening =8^)

Most of the biamping that I've done, for myself and others, has been with planar mains(either Acoustat or Maggie), and transmission line woofers. To me; the greatest benefit to realize with biamping, is the cleaning up of the signal passed to the mains amp, via removal of bass freqs. That and the other benes mentioned in my first post, none of which would be minimized by the original system's crossover. If one were separating the drivers within a three way system, I'd have to agree that the woofer's crossover network would best be removed. The TS didn't specify the system he intends to employ, outside of mentioning, "bass, highs and mids".

I've been multi-amping professional systems for over forty years, as a sound technician, but- thanks for the tutorial. I'm NOT referring to subwoofers, as the ones I've done for home audio are crossed as high as 325Hz(10th order Butterworth). The object being to remove as much bass burden from the mid/high section of the system as possible. With the TacT RCS 2.2, in a system comprised of planar speakers and transmission line woofers; this yields a VERY coherent presentation. The first time I did this for a customer, was back in 1980. Of course, that was with the Dahlquist DQLP-1, at 200Hz, and not at 60db/oct. He had Acoustat Model IIIs, an Apt Holman, a couple Hafler DH-500s, the 10" transmission lines that I built for him, and was grateful/gracious enough to let me demo his system to others. My first personal biamped system was comprised of a pair of KEF LS3/5As, and separate KEF B-139 woofers crossed at 200Hz, with a custom DeCoursey high/low pass active network. That system sold quick, and the $$ was used to by a pair of Acoustats. =8^) "Biamping" IS the correct terminology for the application, and it works wonderfully.